ArticlePerioperative medicine (London, England)2026
The preventive effect of feedforward control nursing on complications and adverse events during the recovery period of gynecological general anesthesia patients.
Article in Perioperative medicine (London, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo explore the preventive effect of feedforward control nursing on complications and adverse events during the recovery period of gynecological general anesthesia patients.
methodsTotal 130 patients who underwent gynecological general anesthesia surgery at our hospital during January 2023 to January 2025 were selected as the research subjects. A retrospective analysis of clinical data was performed. According to different nursing methods, they were divided into a conventional group (n = 64) and a feedforward group (n = 66). The conventional group received routine nursing. The feedforward group received feedforward control nursing interventions on the basis of the conventional group. The complications, adverse nursing events, quality of general anesthesia resuscitation and nursing satisfaction were compared between the two groups. The Aldrete awakening scores at the time of entry and exit were analyzed between the two groups.
resultsThe feedforward group had fewer various complications and lower overall incidence of complications than the conventional group (P < 0.05). The feedforward group had much lower total incidence of adverse nursing events than the conventional group (P < 0.05). The feedforward group had shorter retention time, spontaneous breathing recovery time, extubation time, and awakening time than the conventional group (P < 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in the total scores of consciousness, blood oxygen, respiration, activity, blood pressure, and physiological functions between the two groups when entering the room (P > 0.05). However, the scores of various physiological functions in both groups were higher when exiting the room than entering the room, and the feedforward group had much higher scores than the conventional group (P < 0.05). The satisfaction rate of nursing in the feedforward group was 92.42%, markedly higher than 78.13% of the conventional group (P < 0.05).
conclusionFeedforward control nursing can effectively prevent complications and adverse events during the recovery period of gynecological general anesthesia patients, have positive significance in improving overall recovery quality and nursing satisfaction and promoting patient recovery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.